People want an easy and effective way to remove earwax (cerumen), moisture, dead skin, dirt, small microorganisms, and other residue from their ears. A recent study found that despite the introduction of consumer-based ‘Do-It-Yourself’ earwax removal kits, “there is currently no simple, safe and effective method of self-removal of earwax.” (See Leong/Aldern 2005 study). The most common methods are ineffective, messy, brute-force approaches that pose many potential risks, mishaps, and side effects including dizziness, otitis externa (“swimmer's ear”), pain, vertigo, tinnitus, abrasion with bleeding, infection, and perforation of the eardrum.
Cotton swabs are equally ineffective at removing wax and only push the cerumen further into the ear canal. The impaction of the cerumen against the eardrum can cause infection, irritation, pain, and perforation of the eardrum. Home remedies like ear candling is also strongly discouraged by medical practitioners.
Most of the current earwax removal kits on the market include an agent to soften the wax, followed by an irrigation method to loosen and flush out the wax. Different types of methods (i.e., cerumenolysis) are used to soften and rinse out the ear. The type of solutions used in some commercial and consumer products include warm water, hypertonic seawater, hypoallergenic solutions, carbamide peroxide 6.5, glycerin, sodium bicarbonate and glycerin, mineral oil, olive oil, vinegar, alcohol, docusate, and basic saline. If some of the solution remains in the ear canal, it may cause a severe otitis externa that requires medical treatment.
The ear is then irrigated using water or other mixture listed above by a syringe or rubber bulb. In some cases a syringe is preferred over a bulb to avoid inserting the device too far inside the ear canal and causing damage to the eardrum. A syringe will shoot a straighter stream of fluid as well. To limit messiness, an ear basin is used to collect the wax and irrigating solution. To avoid dizziness, warm water irrigation is preferred to the use of cold water. The most common problems reported with any irrigation method include otitis externa (“swimmer's ear”), pain, vertigo, tinnitus, and perforation of the eardrum.
Alternatively, some consumers use a few drops of a solution that evaporates water in one's ear canal and relieves water clogging, discomfort, or the sensation of fullness or hearing impairment. Drops, however, may become trapped behind the wax in the ear canal or cause extreme dryness. Evaporation drops are not effective in removing earwax and other non-fluids.
Ear picks to dig out or loosen earwax also pose dangers to the ear canal and eardrum and are far inferior to what is used by general medical practitioners.
Moreover, there are currently no effective consumer ear vacuums on the market. A recent study found that among the few devices available, none of them were constructed in such a way to created a strong enough vacuum to remove a significant level of wax or water, or to alleviate any discomfort (Leong/Aldern 2005). There are also ear vacuum devices on the market designed to clean hearing aids, but these products do not extract wax or contaminants from the actual ear canal. To date, the only effective ear vacuums are expensive medical devices used by trained practitioners.
Then there are the ear dryers that are designed to dry moisture contained in the ear canal or on the surface of the eardrum, but they are not an effective means of removing earwax or other foreign objects.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,879,289 (Hand-held portable endoscopic camera) describes a device that combines a lens, light source, and video camera in a portable single hand-held housing. The hand-held portable endoscopic camera with display means allows a user to see the interior of the ear canal of a patient, but another person must operate this device. This device is also not necessarily designed for cleaning the ear canal and it does not contain any safety features. It does not disclose any mechanism for removing contaminants from the ear canal. Also, a person cannot self-inspect his or her ear canal using this device because the display is attached to the hand-held body.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,916,150 (Speculum for simultaneously viewing and removing obstructions) discloses a speculum device that allows the user to simultaneously view the ear canal and remove obstructions from the ear canal. This device, however, is a manual device for a medical professional and present deficiencies both as to the viewing and removal of ear wax. Likewise, Japanese Patent No. 8-173382 (Inspecting and cleaning tool for earhole inside) discloses a tool that uses a fiberscope for the inspection of the interior of the ear canal while simultaneously using suction to remove ear wax from the ear canal, but this device does not have an easy-to-manipulate wand. In the Japanese patent, the wax must travel from the inspecting tool via a hose to the base. There reference is also deficient as to the viewing of the person's ear canal and requires the vacuum and lighting means to be located separately from the inspecting tool.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,919,130 (Video otoscope) discloses a video otoscope that displays video images of the interior of the ear on a display means and also has a port to which insufflating air (positive or negative pressure) can be applied “to stimulate the tympanic membrane.” This device, however, does not provide for the removal of ear wax but instead includes a port for insufflations so that air can be introduced to stimulate the membrane (or equalize/unblock the Eustachian tube).
None of the products or methods described above allow the user to see adequately inside his or her own ear canal or for that matter another person's ear canal, and effectively, safely and conveniently remove residue and debris from one's own ear. Accordingly, the only way presently available to remove ear wax residue is frequent visits with a trained medical practitioner equipped to use conventional mechanical methods including a curette or Jobson-Horne probe and microsuctioning.